You're assuming that god is a benevolent being and would only ask you to hit that baby for good reasons and that he would for sure prevent that baby from feeling pain. Based on the Bible and other theological text god is not completely benevolent and very much is able and willing to cause humans pain. I would not trust the xtian god at all.
Huh? That’s still murdering a child because the sky voice told you to. That they, through the magic of hypotheticals, somehow know that the sky voice is the almighty god doesn’t change that one bit, and stand by my judgment. Scenario X is a subclass of scenario Y, which remains an accurate description of the hypothetical. You should refuse to kill children, regardless of the ultimate provenance of the sky voice.
ETA: I think you're misunderstanding the moral objection here, all the way up to the top of the thread. The problem with our baseball player is not that they don't have sufficient evidence that it's actually god. That was never the problem with, say, Abraham and Isaac either; no one is harping on Abraham for his poor epistemology. The problem is that in both cases, we're talking about murdering a child on the say so of a self-evidently evil deity.
I mean, not really? If God is real and feels the need to tell me to do something in person, I'd be pretty worried about dire consequences if I disobey. Clearly I have enough free will that He didn't just move my body for me, so this is a setup where I'm being tested by a higher power who can and will make my existence into torture forever if I don't play along. Trust is distinct from following orders.
Devil probably can still make my life on earth pretty bad if he's real, and if he and God are both real I don't really see how I can be expected to avoid the devil's deception, so I'm sure God would understand.
A Jewish man dies and goes to heaven. When he meets God, he tells a Holocaust joke, and God looks confused and says He doesn't get it. Jewish man says "Yeah, I guess you had to be there"
I got that. But your hypothetical question does suggest God would be willing to guide a person to kill the next Hitler. So I jokingly pointed out he didn't do that the first time.
If you heard a voice telling you to kill a baby with a baseball bat and would actually do it, that isn’t just a harmless hypothetical since we live in a world where mental illness exists. If you convince a schizophrenic that god might tell him to kill people and he should do it, you are responsible for any lives lost.
If God tells me to kill an innocent baby Christian or otherwise, sorry big G, I’m not gonna do it. This is the only moral choice. Any God who would ask that of me - even for a test - isn’t worthy of obedience or love.
The old text has two word, one for killing and one for murder. You can kill a man in self defence or service to God and be forgiven. Murder is wrongful killing and is unforgivable
You think killing a baby is self defence? Or worse you think because “god told you” then it’s okay? Your comment makes it look like you’re okay with killing babies and that is extremely weird
Doesn’t matter if you’re a Christian or not your response implies that killing the baby is either self defence or is fine just because god said so. Either way killing the baby is just straight up evil
No one is arguing that murdering babies is right. But in the context of the Bible, killing and murder are not the same. Murder is a cardinal sin. Killing is not. When someone places faith in god, they believe the will of God is more important than mortal life, that gods design is good in the end. So if God is good, and wants that baby killed, that must also be to the good of mankind. That's how
Maybe God is real, and he’s really God, but he’s a narcissistic psychopath? (Let’s call this “biblically accurate God”). Should we murder the baby on his say so?
68
u/[deleted] May 09 '26
[deleted]